Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06668-06
Original file (06668-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                                               JRE
                                                                                  Docket No. 06668-06
                                                                                 2 January 2008



This is in reference to your ap plication naval record pursuant to the pro Uni ted States Code, section 1552
A three-member panel of the Boar Records, sitting in executive se ssion , application on 6 December 2007 injustice were reviewed in accordance regulations and procedures appli cant Board. Documentary material cons of your application, together wit support thereof, your naval reco rd regulations and policies.
After careful and conscientious c record, the Board found that the insufficient to establish the exi stence error or injustice.
As a preliminary matter, the Boar disorder and insomnia are not con~ laws administered by the D epartment

The Board was not persuaded that ~ record which you cited in your erroneous or unjust. The Board no contained in those entries was information you reported. The Boar established a basis for it to add
 application for correction of your visions of title 10 of the for Correction of Naval 3510fl, considered your allegations of error and lance with administrative able to the proceedings of this considered by the Board consisted all material submitted in d and applicable statutes, consideration of the entire evidence submitted was 3tence of probable material

 I noted that attention deficit cons idered disabilities under the of the Navy.
fly of the entries in your application are materially ted that the information ived in large part from concluded that you have not ~ny medical or psychological diagnoses to your record. In a have not demonstrated that you physical disability that was naval service. The fact that compensation from the Department probative of the existence of record because the VA awards si issue of fitness for military from active duty. The issue of benefits from the VA is a matter rather than the Department of t
In view of the foregoing, your names and votes of the members upon request.
It is regretted that the circum that favorable action cannot be the Board reconsider its decisi material evidence or other matt the Board. In this regard, it a presumption of regularity att~ Consequently, when applying for naval record, the burden is on I existence of probable material
~dition, it concluded that you were unfit for duty by reason of ~curred in or aggravated by your iou are receiving disability it of Veterans (VA) is not ~ error or injustice in your naval ich benefits without regard to the ervice at the time of release your entitlement to additional r within the purview of the VA he Navy.
application has been denied. The of the panel will be furnished

stances of your case are such taken. You are entitled to have n upon submission of new and not previously considered by Ls important to keep in mind that inches to all official records. a correction of an official :he applicant to demonstrate the error or injustice.
Sincerely,
 Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00651-09

    Original file (00651-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The VA st for service connection for three other ugh you had numerous minor conditions that did jidual compensable ratings, VA rating officials he combination of those minimal disabilities ed you with an unspecified “employment arranted a combined overall rating of 10%. Ther as increased to 40% effective 2 December 1998, ive 30 August 2006. compensable disability rating on 9 March 1995 ate the existence of error or injustice in your this regard, the Board noted that the VA ing without...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR849 14

    Original file (NR849 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In April 2010, after waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and present your case to an administrative discharge board, your commanding officer recommended separation under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Finally, the Board concluded that your assertion of being set up to fail at standing watch is without merit sinre there is no evidence in the record, and you provided no such evidence to support this assertion. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08976-08

    Original file (08976-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and preweo in accordance with administrative ocedures applicable to the proceedings of this ry material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support - thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. You discharge for the martial for an of however, the Boar 1 April to 9 June In its review of potentially mitig service, and the condition of your because of that c insufficient to w The Board was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR336 14

    Original file (NR336 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    after careful and conscientious consideration of che entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to satisfactorily participate in the Marine Corps Reserve and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00953-07

    Original file (00953-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00 CRSDocket No: 953-07 27 March 2008This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code section 1552.A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Record s, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08408-02

    Original file (08408-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of session, considered your injustice were reviewed in applicable to the proceedin consisted of your appli naval record records were lost. Documentary material considered by the Board together with all material submitted in support thereof, your s, regulations and policies. applyi g for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the : W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08469-09

    Original file (08469-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. The Board found t to explain why you were retired from your Commanding Officer’s perspective. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10100-07

    Original file (10100-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful and conscientious consideration of th record, the Board found that the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable error or injustice. The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Co November 1969. In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09831-07

    Original file (09831-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Records, sitting in executive session, application on 25 November 2008. Documentary material considered by the Boar your application, together with all material submit thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes and policies. In addition, the Board considered th the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB) dated 3 Octo copy of which is attached.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07721-07

    Original file (07721-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TIR Docket No: 7721-07 18 August 2008 This is in reference to naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. your application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United A three-member panel of the Boar Records, sitting in executive se application on 12 August 2008. injustice were reviewed in accor regulations and procedures appli Board. Further, an RE-4 reenlistment code is...